4 ms·

I guess it does not work like in Germany where rulings by the Constitutional Court have the power of law. So if they say "this law is invalid, you can't just s

by eis 13y ago

I guess it does not work like in Germany where rulings by the Constitutional Court have the power of law. So if they say "this law is invalid, you can't just spy on everyone", the second part of the sentence would be law from then on. This is my understanding at least, but I am nowhere near an expert in matters of law so take it with a huge grain of salt :)

Tomte 13y ago
That's false. Only the "law is invalid" part carries the force of law. The second part is just obiter dictum. Look at http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/rs20100302_1bvr025608.html http://www.bverfg.de/entscheidungen/rs20100302_1bvr025608.ht... The four bold points after "Urteil" and before "Gründe" are the legal holding. The rest is just explaining the holding. Not even the "Leitsätze" on top are binding in any way. But with those, at least, you can argue that the court indicated pretty clearly that it considers those sentences important, making speculation about future verdicts at least a little bit fruitful.